"Angry Scot" faces child porn charges

[AC]

So the guy was caught with "1,100 child porn files on two computers, along with 14 CDs" and only gets 20 months?

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by AC

So the guy was caught with "1,100 child porn files on two computers, along with 14 CDs" and only gets 20 months?

Got to love the (lack of a) justice system in Canada.

[Russic]

Great to see kids are safe from this guy ... for 20 months. I wonder how his treatment in prison will be?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Russic

Great to see kids are safe from this guy ... for 20 months. I wonder how his treatment in prison will be?

Considering he turned himself in, hes probably going to cushy minimum security private jail.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Got to love the (lack of a) justice system in Canada.

I dunno, almost 2 years seems like a pretty fair sentence to me. Jail time was deserved for sure, but let's not get all Maud Flanders on the justice system.

The guy was looking at pictures and not actually abusing the children....evil in its own right, but I dont think its too much different in the levels between a drug user and a drug trafficker. Neither is desirable, but at least there was no direct abuse.

I'm sure there will be plently of punishment from his cell-mates in those 20 months.

[photon]

I was going to say that there's quite a difference between looking at pictures and abusing a kid or even worse, creating the stuff.

Wouldn't the pictures actually make him less likely to actually abuse a kid? Relieve the sexual tension and all that?

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Locke

Considering he turned himself in, hes probably going to cushy minimum security private jail.

He turned himself in the day after they raided his home and found his stash in 2006. Not much else to do other than run to Thailand or something.

From another article on the sentencing, you can kind of get a glimpse as to what may have happened as the trial date came closer:

Smith initially challenged the legality of the searches and his trial could have been a test case as to whether police need search warrants to obtain subscriber information from Internet service providers. But the actor abandoned his Charter challenge and pleaded guilty this spring to possession of child pornography and to making child pornography available, through the use of peer-to-peer online file sharing networks. Smith has no prior criminal record and is married, with two children aged seven and four.

Crown attorney Allison Dellandrea asked for a term of 24 months in jail.

Defence lawyer Cindy Wasser sought a term of 18 months in custody. The fact that Smith has two children of "a like age" was an aggravating factor in his offences, said Judge Clark. "He should have been more keenly aware of the danger of the exploitive material he saw fit to enjoy," the judge observed.


If I had to guess, I would say that the sentence was arrived at after the defence agreed to drop the Charter challenge and enter a guilty plea in return for the Crown seeking a maximum of 24 months in jail. Had the Charter challenge been unsuccessful and the trial completed, the Crown would have probably sought a higher sentence.

[photon]

Hm, if he was distributing the stuff too that should increase the sentence as well.

So you're saying that the Crown didn't think they could win a charter challenge so dropped what they were looking for for a sentence?

And it's slightly disturbing that police can get subscriber info from ISP's without a warrant.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by photon

Hm, if he was distributing the stuff too that should increase the sentence as well.

So you're saying that the Crown didn't think they could win a charter challenge so dropped what they were looking for for a sentence?

And it's slightly disturbing that police can get subscriber info from ISP's without a warrant.

I haven't read anywhere that he was creating the stuff and I have always assumed that the distributing was nothing more than seeding torrents or making your downloaded files available on Kazaa for example (I don't know if he used torrents and I don't mean to pick on Kazaa but those are just a couple of examples that came to mind).

It's not a comment on whether the Crown thought they could win the challenge or not. It would be a fantastic issue to have litigated and one that could, potentially, reach our highest court. At some point, pragmatics kick in and both sides probably realized a speedy resolution was the best outcome.

Even if successful in his challenge, Smith probably didn't want to be drug through the various appeals and what not. Usually the cutoff for spending your sentence in a provincial institution instead of a federal pound you in the a** prison is two years. That's why you often see sentences of two years less a day and that's why the starting point in sentencing in this case was 24 months.

The Crown would probably rather have a guaranteed conviction with a sentence of 24 months or less than having to spend resources fighting over a couple extra months/years on the sentence.

[photon]

Yeah I don't think he was making it, but still sharing it over a p2p network is distribution and should be punished more than simply downloading it IMO.

Interesting though, thanks for the insight fredr123. I always know there's reasons for things in the judicial system, just sometimes those reasons are vague to the rabble.

[Scrambler]

It all depends as well if he was charged with a summary offense or a indictable offense. Many people who get caught downloading Child Porn but only have per say 5 to 10 kiddie porn files among 100 legal adult porn files are not considered as much of a threat to children (ie: the public) and therefore a summary charge is made.

Many circumstances involving summary offenses do not wind up in prison time being served, more commonly they end up as conditional discharges.

Indictable has a minimum jail time of 45 days, and is when the Crown suggests to the court that the accused is a threat to society due to the overwhelming amount of child porn (in this case over 1000).

I chimed in on this in a past thread, (after having done a study on pedophilia) how I think that some pedophiles can be 'cured' from their sexual desires through therapy and how some use child pornography as an outlet instead of abusing children themselves.

I found this an interesting read on youtube done by an admitted pedophile:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibuqQ-xEjvQ

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by photon

I was going to say that there's quite a difference between looking at pictures and abusing a kid or even worse, creating the stuff.

Wouldn't the pictures actually make him less likely to actually abuse a kid? Relieve the sexual tension and all that?

In the short term (for an immeadiate fix, much like a hit of coke or crack) then yes I suppose, but in the long term it actually heightens the tension. Soon the pics he has stop working, so he needs to find newer, more intense pics. And then movies...

And then once that stops working, the stalking and abductions begin. At this point his mind is pretty degenerated and ill.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

In the short term (for an immeadiate fix, much like a hit of coke or crack) then yes I suppose, but in the long term it actually heightens the tension. Soon the pics he has stop working, so he needs to find newer, more intense pics. And then movies...

And then once that stops working, the stalking and abductions begin. At this point his mind is pretty degenerated and ill.

Is this believed to be true by psychological professionals, or is this an opinion of yours?

I want to know, not trying to be a jerk.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

In the short term (for an immeadiate fix, much like a hit of coke or crack) then yes I suppose, but in the long term it actually heightens the tension. Soon the pics he has stop working, so he needs to find newer, more intense pics. And then movies...

And then once that stops working, the stalking and abductions begin. At this point his mind is pretty degenerated and ill.

I don't know, I wouldn't say that's the case for all hetrosexuals and normal porn; viewing porn doesn't lead to rape and abduction of women.

I guess it would depend on the individual and the source of their problem. If it's simple sexual attraction to children then I don't see one leading to the other, if it's more a case like a rapist where it isn't just sexual attraction but the violence and power that's driving the act then yeah I could see that.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Is this believed to be true by psychological professionals, or is this an opinion of yours?

I want to know, not trying to be a jerk.

I was originally speaking purely from opinion, but in retrospect I actually did have this conversation with a PHD in Psych in an informal setting (drunk over pints) and their own individual opinion was pretty close to what I stated. They had in-fact suffered some trauma as a youth which led to them becoming a Psych.

So in the case of this one particular Psych, it is a professional opinion.

I don't know, I wouldn't say that's the case for all hetrosexuals and normal porn; viewing porn doesn't lead to rape and abduction of women.

I guess it would depend on the individual and the source of their problem. If it's simple sexual attraction to children then I don't see one leading to the other, if it's more a case like a rapist where it isn't just sexual attraction but the violence and power that's driving the act then yeah I could see that.

I imagine for a lot of Pedo's, the violence and power have as much to do with it as the age of the victim. Some Pedo's are the kid who was bullied his whole life, and now as an adult, abducts and rapes playground bullies in revenge. Others might be like the one in the video, who understand their problem and can deal with it.

[Russic]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Is this believed to be true by psychological professionals, or is this an opinion of yours?

I want to know, not trying to be a jerk.

As with everything in psychology, the opinions are mixed. In my travels, I've found evidence for catharsis to be rather weak. I often think about it when people commenting on fighting in hockey refer to it as necessary as a means to relieve aggression in a healthier way than bertuzii-ing somebody. The scientific data I've seen (which I will not cite as it's been years and I don't feel like digging it up) seems to imply that behavior like fighting may work for a short time, but over the long haul it can lead to increased aggression. In this case, looking at child porn may help with immediate urges, but doesn't actually lead to the behaviour weakening over time.

Keep in mind, it's psychology. Opinions vary depending on who you talk to. It's very hard to get concrete scientific evidence on human behaviour.

Photon is correct in that the whole thing isn't really a step-ladder. Watching b-grade porn today won't lead to watching snuff films the week later. Just because somebody watches child pornography doesn't mean that individual is actually participating in the abuse of a child. That being said, there are massive individual differences within every population. Take 10 people and show them some terrible hardcore stuff and they could all react totally differently to it.

I did not know he turned himself in (obviously I haven't kept up with this story), so he probably will end up in a system that is fairly relaxed.

[photon]

That video was interesting Scrambler, but I must say I'm stunned at the comments.. given the venue was youtube and the subject matter, I'm shocked that there's any balance in the comments whatsoever! Videos about yellow shoes have far worse comment threads than that one!

[Scrambler]

I've never actually read the comments (I never do on youtube anyway), just the video itself. It certainly brings up some interesting points.

From what I found, almost everytime a person gets charged with possesing child porn, that person gets advised by their lawyer to see a specialist (Psychologist) to assses their actual threat to children whether it be now or in the distant future. The psychologist then makes a report and submits it to the Crown and it's up to them how much punishment they want to pursue.